Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Mar 14, 2005 3:32am
Forum: etree Subject: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Hi folks, about a year ago, after much discussion and feedback, we began a test period of hosting supplemental "lossy" copies (mp3, ogg vorbis) of shows alongside the "archival" lossless-format (shn, flac) parent copies we maintain. This has been intended to provide wider exposure beyond the trading pool, in line with the Archive's "Universal Access to Human Knowledge" mission. Bands can opt out of this (as can their individual tapers).

The test period was supposed to last about a year, and then we'd take a public look at how it's been working out. So, it's time for that look!

Patrons, how has this had an impact for you at the patron and community level? Tapers and contributors, your experiences? Band reps, if you're reading- how has this worked out for the artists themselves? Archive staff, how do you think it's gone from the IA's end? Please share your experiences and observations- let's talk real instead of hypothetical.

Note, this discussion is not intended to rehash the original discussion we had. It's to evaluate what we have in place now, based on effects we actually see now. Just saying the same thing as a year ago on this thread won't be helpful, since we heard it the first time. ;) Also, please confine responses to this current thread; don't go back and reply on year-old threads.

Thanks for participating!

-Diana Hamilton, volunteer LMA curator

Recapping IA Director Brewster Kahle's outline of a little over a year ago:
"access formats on LMA (mp3 ogg etc):

"A theory may be emerging on a way to experiment with easing access:
* pick a period of time for a test, say 2004
* respect individual [bands,] tapers and uploaders who say "no [lossy] versions" for particular shows. Uploaders would be a practical way to filter this.
* after a time to let this all settle, convert other shows to 192Kb/sec MP3's
* see if it increases or decreases our user population significantly
* strongly encourage lossless formats for uploads (education)
* openly discuss the evaluation of this system about this time next year.

"You may ask-- why a test period of a year? well we are an archive and we think long term. Our culture makes us hesitant about taking things out of archives (images of burning come to mind), and restrictions that last forever. Forever is a long time. "

Brewster also answered a followup then:
"'If it is decided that hosting degraded audio files was a bad idea, are we going to delete these files off of the servers?'

"yes.

"for instance, we had old divx files of the prelinger movie archives at one point because it was the only viable low bandwidth movie format. we dont do that format anymore."

[I expect to post a results wrapup in the near future. Last call!]

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-03-14 11:32:56

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Jamie Lee Date: Feb 11, 2005 1:28am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I think the use of MP3s, etc., for the streaming aspect of the site is essential. Those using it would rather listen to a quick stream prior to downloading. I would venture a guess that this also helps newer bands with exposure. However, many tapers do not like the files to be downloaded in MP3 in lossy format, and I agree. I would prefer that the streaming aspect be there, but those lossy files be restricted to only listening and not downloading.
Thank you all for doing what you do. The site is a wonderful resource, and keeps getting better.
Jamie

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: xtifr Date: Feb 12, 2005 5:46am
Forum: etree Subject: what about bands? Don't they want to be heard?

Tapers are important, but the bands are even more important. Why would any sane musician, who wants people to hear his music, go along with a no-lossless-format policy?

As a former musician myself (well, I still play, but massive stage fright drove me out of live performing back in the seventies), I would have to say that if I were releasing (some of) my music for free, I would want to make sure that it reached as wide an audience as possible. And I would allow taping only only with the understanding that the tapers cannot add any further restrictions to what people do with my music.

I've never understood policies like the Disco Biscuits'. In fact, I've never listened to the Disco Biscuits, because my attitude is, if you don't want (some) people to listen to your music, I am perfectly willing to not listen, even though I'm in the exclusive club (broadband users) who are allowed to listen to DB. I don't like that sort of elitism, and I don't support bands that engage in it.

What I would like to see is for the Archive to offer a per-band option to require the creation of derivative formats. Sure, nobody's been demanding this, but I bet that if it were an option, some bands would probably go for it.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 12, 2005 9:42pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: what about bands? wanting to be heard "right"

I think you're asking there, "Why would any band specify No MP3 here?"

We've seen that each band is individual in their thinking about this stuff. Consider the divide between trade-friendly and trade-unfriendly artists. In the unfriendly camp, besides the "we'll just get ripped off" notion, there are a lot of artists for whom the issue is simply wanting to have control over and proper presentation of their art. They want to make sure listeners hear just "the good stuff."

The latter feeling extends into the friendly camp as well. That's why we see some bands here who ask that each upload come only through specific approval by the band. And that's why some ask for lossless file options only.

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-02-13 05:42:43

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: svenkid Date: Feb 12, 2005 10:30am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: what about bands? Don't they want to be heard?

>>>>Tapers are important, but the bands are even more important. Why would any sane musician, who wants people to hear his music, go along with a no-lossless-format policy?

As a former musician myself (well, I still play, but massive stage fright drove me out of live performing back in the seventies), I would have to say that if I were releasing (some of) my music for free, I would want to make sure that it reached as wide an audience as possible. And I would allow taping only only with the understanding that the tapers cannot add any further restrictions to what people do with my music.

What I would like to see is for the Archive to offer a per-band option to require the creation of derivative formats. Sure, nobody's been demanding this, but I bet that if it were an option, some bands would probably go for it. <<<<


best post ive seen for in favor of lossy files, if the band "wants" mp3's etc, than thats it. for me, nucleus wanted me to allow mp3's for their shows, so I went back and changed the options to allow it :)

This post was modified by svenkid on 2005-02-12 18:30:40

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: PhunkyZen Date: Feb 13, 2005 6:54am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I think that the MP3 versions are excellent.
The streaming capabilities are what make this site so amazing.

Personally, i like to listen to a show before i spend a few hours and gigs of hard drive space downloading them.

I don't feel that allowing lossy formats "pollutes the trading pool" because the lossless formats are very readily available for anyone who wanted them.

Lossy formats give the music more exposure.
I know personally i like to just go around and stream random bands that i've never heard before.
If i had to download all those shows most likely i wouldn't listen to as many new bands as i do.

This site is an excellent source for musicians and music fans alike. Giving unknown bands their much deserved recognition and exposure while giving music fans a nearly unlimited resource of new music to check out.

I am a taper, and i love the fact that i can have my shows available for people to stream instantly.
I never really understood people being so anal about mp3's and other lossy formats. If it gets the vibe across that's all that matters ;)

And mp3's allow the vibe to be spread to many more people who otherwise wouldn't be able to hear this amazing music.

This post was modified by PhunkyZen on 2005-02-13 14:54:23

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Unstoppable Drew Date: Feb 15, 2005 11:29am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I'm all for the lossie versions. I started putting shows on the LMA for two reasons: 1) as a 'safety copy' of my masters, many of which are of obscure bands that don't exist any more, and 2) to share the music. The ease of streaming an mp3 version, or downloading a couplke tracks quickly to check out a new band is a good thing IMHO. Every show I have put up so far, and will in the future, will have derivation allowed.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 15, 2005 10:59pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

1) as a 'safety copy' of my masters, many of which are of obscure bands that don't exist any more

Lossy or not, I cherish this reason, thanks! Keeping material preserved while sharing it with the world- that's what we're here for. :)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Unstoppable Drew Date: Feb 16, 2005 3:46am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Most of my library is shows I recorded in and around Boston from 95-98. Unfortunately, a lot of it won't make it to the archive as I have no way to contact the artists to get permission. I've been trying, but there's still a lot more in the "can't find" column than in the "got permission" column.

I've long maintained that if my house were to catch fire, the only material possesion I would try to save is the box of tapes, because that's the only thing I can't replace.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 16, 2005 5:17am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Wow Drew, how big is your box of not-uploaded-yets?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Unstoppable Drew Date: Feb 16, 2005 6:00am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

According the the Excel spreadsheet I'm using to keep track of this, I have shows from 50 artists, and have received permission from 9, plus 2 more that were already live on the Archive. I still have a ways to go to digitize all the shows of the bands that are live, and currently have feelers out to 7 more artists.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Unstoppable Drew Date: Feb 16, 2005 6:06am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

My more or less complete tapelist can be found at http://www.marold.org/tapelist.html . I've only been concentrating on the stuff I personally recorded, and not what I traded for.

This post was modified by Unstoppable Drew on 2005-02-16 14:06:00

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffBrad Leblanc Date: Feb 16, 2005 10:53pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Drew, you may want to consider transferring and torrenting these tapes before they deteriorate further while waiting for permission to archive them.

http://bt.etree.org

This way there are others preserving it too.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Unstoppable Drew Date: Feb 16, 2005 10:59pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

One of the things I'm doing is putting them on my own ftp server, but ever since I started getting permission to put stuff on the archive, I've been concentrating on that material.
It's a lot of stuff all around.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Unstoppable Drew Date: Feb 17, 2005 12:30am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

The other problem with torrenting them is someone else has to want to download it, which is not a given with a lot of that material.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Jim Walent Date: Mar 15, 2005 2:41am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Hi Diane, Ithink having the Lossy mp3 version along side the lossless FLAC/.SHN formats gives the opportunity of Archive.org to expand to a larger audience. I as a taper/Uploader prefer the lossless versions, but if having the lossy version will give access to music that otherwise would be inaccessable to a non-taper type, so be it. I am of the mentality of the music is out there to share make it as easy as possible for the artist to get it to the people.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffInfiniteOhms Date: Feb 12, 2005 11:23pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Its seems like there have been plenty of postiive replies from tapers, but here is one more.
I support mp3s for 3 main reasons:
1. I hate waiting, if i'm just going to listen to a show on my computer i'm fine with listening to an mp3.
2. When i tape/seed a show i would like as many people as possible to be able to enjoy it ... and i dont want to have to spend any time explaining how to use SHN/FLAC to people who often dont really care about the quality loss caused by mp3s
3. most people still dont have broadband, if i didn't have broadband i'd certainly want mp3/oggs posted.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Ole Uncle John Date: Mar 15, 2005 11:32am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

The "Universal access" of Archives purpose statement is a commendable and difficult goal. With an interconnected world, the majority of which is still using dial-up connections, the inclusion of lossy formats to the Archive is essential. As a Boston area live music fan now working in the Middle East with a 56k connection that I pay for by the minute, I wouldn't have any "access" without lossy files. Of course I'd prefer shn and hope to replace my mp3 collection someday when I am back in the "land of the free and home of the broadband connection" but for now I'm grateful for the "access" that lossy provides.
I have also been introduced to artists who are new to me through this format. It's highly unlikely I ever would have invested precious connection time to sample these new artists if they weren't available in lossy. Thanks for the tip on the Mermen, Diana :)

I appreciate the attitude of VA_TAPER in a previous post who said: "One taper, here, who supports mp3/lossy versions of shows. For me its all about sharing the music on the artists terms not mine. They were kind enough to let me haul my equipment in to their shows, get me in early, etc., with the intent of me sharing them." His perspective is spot on as are several others tapers who are participating in this discussion. Unfortunately there are also some tapers of incredible self importance who mistakenly think they are the "thing" not the musicians who are positive towards lossy formats. Talk of a "strike" by these sorts is humorous as there will be plenty of "live music fans" to fill the gap.

I strongly support the inclusion of lossy formats in the Archive and appreciate further your integrity in clearly labeling same and allowing artists the opportunity to opt out.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: MattD Date: Feb 11, 2005 2:47am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I'd love to know stats on how much bandwidth the mp3 downloads and streams used vs. lossless over this time period (month by month, maybe?).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffMatt Vernon Date: Feb 11, 2005 5:00am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I have used the streaming option many times. I have had email correspondence with many heretofore lossless shn collectors who also like the streaming option to sample or listen at work.


Having the lossy versions tagged to their parental "lossless" source removes much confusion.

I am also interested in people's comments on the experiment in progress with Phil Lesh where we are only using flac as the hosted lossless option.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Apr 11, 2005 2:46am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator) is over

Evaluation period has ended, and results of this thread are reported in a new post:
http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=32962

Thanks to all who participated! :)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cwier60 Date: Feb 11, 2005 1:14pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

As a long-time trader, seeder, and supporter of etree and lossless music, I have to add that I'm 100% in favor of the lossless formats in addition to the lossless archives. While I'm not a taper, I have done what I can to seed shows, fix shows requiring aid, and help spread tunes as much as I can. After having helped Matt & crew upload the entire Dead and now Phil archive to the LMA, my use is greatly diminished. But guess what? Assuming this archive is here forever (and not pulled due to changes in the discretion of band members), I don't need to have 4000 hours of GD shows in my personal collection. It's 2005, and I can go to my local LMA archive library and download a show for my listening pleasure. If I want to burn lossless audio, I'll d/l SHN or FLAC, but if I'm checking out a new band or getting something for my portable MP3 player or to listen to on the PC at work, lossless has its advantages. There are now ~850 bands in the archive, and I really enjoy finding new ones I've heard about (or not) - not to mention there are thousands of shows by the bands I love that I've never heard. I doubt I'd ever "check them out" to the extent I do if it were not for the lossless formats. If it were not for etree and the lossless trading community and the great musical friends I've made along the way, I'd probably have never ventured very far beyond the Grateful Dead and family. But with the LMA, and the ability to check out hundreds of new bands, my musical experiences just keep expanding.

And the great thing about the LMA and the whole lossless trading community in general is that we are blessed with being offered so much. Those who love this "hobby" (aka life) have definitely found that it is far more blessed to give than receive. Thus in no way is it correct to assume that those who download MP3s or OGGs are simply leeches. Also, I believe that the availability of both lossless and lossy versions of shows greatly diminishes the likelihood of the polluting the gene pool with MP3-converted seeds. The bottom line is, don't trade for lossless shows unless you know the lineage, which generally means that the md5s match a desired source in the db (unless it's a new seed or uncirculated upgrade).

I think that one benefit that is prevalent with MP3s that should become a standard for FLAC seeds is the presence of ID3 tags. I tried to get tags added to all the new Phil shows in the archive, since they have all been converted to FLAC, which supports tags (unlike SHN), but that was simply too big an additional task that would have further delayed the availabilty of the shows. I'd certainly love to see all seeders add tags to all new FLAC seeds; it adds little work beyond that necessary to create a text file. A big reason I'd rather d/l an MP3 from the archive than create my own MP3s from my SHNs or FLACs is because the MP3s are already tagged, and it is much less effort to d/l the MP3s (even if I already have the lossless version) than to create MP3s and tag them.

The bottom line for me is "The supplemental mp3 idea is working out for me because their availability has greatly helped to expand my musical world."

This post was modified by cwier60 on 2005-02-11 21:14:45

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: VA_TAPER Date: Feb 12, 2005 4:00am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

One taper, here, who supports mp3/lossy versions of shows.
For me its all about sharing the music on the artists terms not mine. They were kind enough to let me haul my equipment in to their shows, get me in early, etc., with the intent of me sharing them.
Any method of distribution works for me; we've got all the original lossless files here, the days of polluting the pool are done. I haven't traded hard discs in years, and I'd venture to say the majority of live recording aquisition in two years will be online not CD distro (if its not now.)
I know I break with a big crowd of other tapers on this aspect, but I feel that the OPTION of lossy versions is a positive one for this community.

peace, chris (VA_TAPER)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: blottoed Date: Feb 12, 2005 5:06am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I am a taper I dont care what happens to my show after i upload it. I would never DL a mp3 to use it as my main source but I do however love the fact that I can hear a show (streamed) before I DL it in shn/flac format

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Itchin Date: Mar 14, 2005 7:14am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Over the years I have mostly been anti MP3. However, technology advances, bandwidth increases and sentiments change. I think adding MP3 as an option was a nice move. I have used the streaming feature and like it for sampling new stuff. As the non-compressed version is always there to get, my personal fear of MP3 has gone away. Leave them on.
Michiel

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Jim F Date: Mar 14, 2005 1:31pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

As a patron it has been an invaluable resource for me to have lossy files available on the LMA. It has allowed me to be turned on to new things and has expanded my music collection considerably. Please keep them!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Mar 2, 2005 7:23am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Here is another aspect of the deriver discussion that hasn't been brought out before as far as I know. Frankly, I wasn't even aware there was an issue up until now. Taper Chris told me,

"...I'm wondering why the option "no lossy derivatives" includes both streaming and MP3 format downloading, maybe its obvious but most tapers have no problem with their shows being streamed in any format and would allow them to be streamed if they had that option while also not allowing downloads in MP3 format, it just seems like these two options could be separated and a lot more of the 20K shows up there could be enjoyed..."

I'm asking for concrete feedback on what the extent of "most tapers" might be. Is this a widespread feeling, something we should indeed address somehow? (Thanks again Chris for bringing it up!)

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-03-02 15:23:20

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffBrad Leblanc Date: Mar 2, 2005 7:55am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

The current answer for why that option is bundled together (all or nothing) is that the files being streamed are the MP3's - if you remove the MP3's, there's nothing to stream in the current system.

Separating them means adjusting access so they can be streamed but not downloaded. Or, creating a lossless stream of FLAC's files.

Will investigate this to see if either option is possible.

-Brad

This post was modified by Brad Leblanc on 2005-03-02 15:55:56

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: pt Date: Mar 2, 2005 8:06am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

This is an interesting point. However, the Archive's systems are currently not architected to allow for us to make content streamable but not downloadable. To do this would take significant reengineering and questioning several assumptions we make about data access (like the more the better).

So, likely making mp3s but only allowing streaming is not on the table. Allowing FLAC streaming may be as that's as simple as drawing a link if the format supports it (does it?).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffBrad Leblanc Date: Mar 2, 2005 11:05am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Allowing FLAC streaming may be as that's as simple as drawing a link if the format supports it (does it?).

Yes, it does although SHN does not (yet another reason SHN should go away...)

http://flac.sourceforge.net/features.html

Streamable: Each FLAC frame contains enough data to decode that frame. FLAC does not even rely on previous or following frames. FLAC uses sync codes and CRCs (similar to MPEG and other formats), which, along with framing, allow decoders to pick up in the middle of a stream with a minimum of delay.

This post was modified by Brad Leblanc on 2005-03-02 19:05:21

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Mar 5, 2005 11:49pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

So, I've nudged people several times in a taper forum about coming over and talking about this streaming vs files aspect here if it was important to them, but no one has. I guess part of the deriver idea is not a hot-button issue.

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-03-06 07:49:51

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bericb Date: Feb 25, 2005 5:44am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

hello all..
I have been part of a few discussions regarding this topic, and have come to a conclusion.

I agree with twatts in his point that this is called an "archive" .. not a jamband mp3 server.
If you are going to allow the lossy formats, then don't call yourself an "archive". I was not under the impression that the archive was started just be a "promotional tool" for bands.

The creation of lossy formats is in the hands of the artists and the uploader as of now, however, the uploader is not allways the person who recorded the show. If a band allows mp3's and the taper who tapes them does not want mp3's made and hosted, what control does he have over someone else uploading the show and allowing the lossy formats? The answer is none. I think this is what the gripe is about from tapers. I have a simple solution.. If a taper never wants to see his recordings hosted on the archive in mp3 format(if the band allows it), then he/she should never ever ever give his tapes away. No trades, no patches, no nothing. Give your tape to the band if they ask, and if it ends up on the archive in mp3 then owell, you're SOL. Other than that you can't stop it, no matter what kind of disclaimers you put in the text file.

I personally dont care one bit for the mp3 listener and have no sympathy for his/her inability to learn the aspects of lossless compression and its ability to be further compressed to mp3 if he/she wants it.

-------------------------------------
_MY OPINION ON (the majority of) MP3 LISTENERS_

They are people listening to the efforts of musician and a soundguy and a taper without giving anything back to the community whatsoever.. Taping has (untill the archive) allways gone hand and hand with trading.. ie: if your a taper and want other shows, well you have to trade your shows to get them.. or if your a trader/collector, you must trade tapes to get tapes..

This doesnt happen anymore..
mp3 users do not trade, they do not contribute, and therfore should have to work a bit to get the music.. ie: figuring out lossless compression, downloading, and ripping mp3's on their own time..
----------------

To get back to the topic.. I feel the archive has done wonders for some lesser known bands, however, you "might" find some tapers out there who do not want their recordings hosted in a lossy format. Since they have no control over that, I guess you would see those tapers NEVER making their recordings see the light of day(publicly traded etc), which in turn would slow down the uploads to the "archive". Some tapers spend thousands of dollars on their hobby to make recordings sound a certain way, so dont be surprised if they "never" let them sound like an mp3.

I say do away with the lossy formats on the "archive"..

thanks..

ericB







Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 25, 2005 9:37am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

the uploader is not allways the person who recorded the show. ...what control does [taper] have over someone else uploading the show and allowing the lossy formats? The answer is none.

The answer is not "none". Tapers (and bands) are welcome to write to admins about a troublesome item so we can talk it over and work things out. We have done this already over the past year.

you "might" find some tapers out there who do not want their recordings hosted in a lossy format. Since they have no control over that, I guess you would see those tapers NEVER making their recordings see the light of day(publicly traded etc), which in turn would slow down the uploads to the "archive".

Please, I am not asking for "might" and "guess" hypotheticals in this thread. I am requesting real data on which to base our analysis of how this is working out for everyone. Can you point to some real life examples where this has occurred with the LMA? Thanks if so, I really would like to hear about them!

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-02-25 17:37:34

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bericb Date: Feb 25, 2005 3:28pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

heynow..

I appreciate the reply.. I think the crux of this lies in the reason that some tapers actually bring equiptment to a show. They do so to capture the event, as best they can, in order to closely reproduce it for playback. I, like many other DAUD tapers, prefer not to tape from a soundboard, even if it is offered. They are mostly lifeless, dry, and lay complete disregard for the ambiant texture of the show. The sonic characteristics of "audience" tapes(recordings)lend themselves verry poorly to compression schemes that are lossy, and render them devoid one hundred percent of what its intention was in the first place... to reproduce the show. Mp3 schemes and the like strip all that is wonderful in an audience tape. Why anyone would want to listen to it is, to me, a compete waste of time. I am not talking about soundboards or matrix tapes here, so dont confuse my intent here. I am strictly talking about audience far field, onstage, and multi mic setup tapes.

I am all for making live music available through the internet. The creation of digitized masters in which every copy of it sounds just like it is amazing to me still, especially considering I was listening to 10th gen audiences tapes in the mid eighties. The ability for anyone and everyone to be able to hear a master audience tape is a great acheivement in the form of the art. But that is where the problem creeps in. Technology and Art sometimes dont see eye to eye, and "I" think that this is such a case.

And no, I cannot provide any "evidence" of any tapers wishes in terms of the "archive" being violated. I do remember a couple threads here and there about some problems that were fixed, but other than that .. none. Thank you for pointing out my errors in my reference. I hope the archive will continue to honor the wishes of the tapers providing the material hosted there, for I would hate to see the uploads dwindle in what is a potentially spectacular resource.

Keep up the good work..

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 25, 2005 8:59pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I was not under the impression that the archive was started just be a "promotional tool" for bands.

Just wanted to address this one extra point: You're right, it wasn't started for that! There have been a few "side effects" of the project and this is an interesting and fun one. If artists can get an extra benefit out of this besides having their music be preserved for the historic record, well that's great! :)

That bands see this benefit is one more point on the side of the "trade friendly = good" argument that we traders are always pushing.

Now that we've been here a couple years, another interesting effect has come out of this. IIRC there have been a few bands who said yes when they were active, and maybe publicity consideration was a part of that. But since then, they've broken up. The archive section now remains as the historical record of the defunct band. (Likewise, those Wayback links have turned out pretty useful for some former official websites!)

I can't think of some of those band names off the top of my head, but can edit this if I do (or if someone knows one, post a reply.)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffTyler Date: Feb 26, 2005 12:46am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

The Troys were a sisters sing/songwriter / punk group in san diego. they were signed in 2001 and 2002/2003 did full band shows under their label contract. but they also enjoyed doing acoustic shows without their band at small coffee shops. THe label didn't like that they were doing the 'non-band' shows and they were dropped in the big 'label clean-out' of 2003. the girls broke up and decided to do solo stuff, and prob won't play together again for a long time (if ever). the shows archived here give a great record of their sound while they were together.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffTyler Date: Feb 26, 2005 1:24am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

also, Zwan (former Smashing Pumpkins' lead singer 'billy corgan' project) broke up in early 2004. so thier continualy contributed section is a testament to their sounds while together.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: thelandlady Date: Feb 25, 2005 7:38am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

These generalizations about the mp3 listener should really be re-thought before they escape to the keyboard. I resent these comments about mp3 listeners as I listen to them all the time. I also give back to all the tapers I have ever met. Helping them setup their equipment, help them out with tapes, trading, and providing means for others to get a hold of the music. Do I trade any mp3 files...no...really you should not generalize people into a single group.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bericb Date: Feb 25, 2005 8:20am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I understand your POV..

I, however, feel that if you want to listen to music in the format of your choosing, then BUY A RIG AND TAPE YOURSELF.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: thelandlady Date: Feb 28, 2005 5:30am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I would actually do this if I could afford to go out and buy a decent rig. Since I don't I do my best to help the tapers out there. Hell, I was at a show once and ran out and bought the dude 3 tapes because he ran out. Luckily it was a festival show that ran all day and I knew the guys taking tickets. They let me back in.

All I can say is I do what I can to help out. If I could go out and buy a rig I WOULD. I don't have the time or money to go out and tape as much as I would like to. That is why if I see a taper at show I always offer them help to set their rig up or give them tapes if I can. Personally that is far more than what most people do when they see a taper at a show. I give as much as I can...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SFSpearit Date: Feb 25, 2005 1:25pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Dude you come off like such a elitist taper snob!
Seriously. Check yourself spitting such venom is bad karma. I disagree with 99% of what you have said. Here is my first gripe.
Why should people have to "work for their music"? Music is to be shared and enjoyed. Everyone Deserves Music! not just the people who toil for it. Please! music is not work! I already spend 40 hours in the "taper mine"
As for the "jamband mp3 server" aspect, I think of it this way. The archive is like a library. When you go to the library you get to check out materials. You need to have different formats available so that those materials are available to everyone. A variety of formats is a GOOD THING. Just like you might go to a regular library and make a photocopy of a page of a book. Maybe you do not need the phsycial book, just the information contained. To force everyone to download lossless formats makes no sense to me and just wastes bandwidth and turns away people who would seek this music. I know a lot of people who stream music from the LMA. No polution. Sure the quality is not the same but who is to say that lossless is going to sound that much better on a crappy computer speaker?

The one thing you are right about about is that we do not "Trade anymore" FTP and broadband has take alot of that away. It is sad, but it is time to move on.

Lossless and Lossy side by side is a GOOD thing.


PS The tapers do have control over MP3 of their sources on the LMA. How many shows have ended up in MP3 that the taper did not intend. I bet is is a very small number. Correct me if I am wrong.

Relax man. Life is too short for this kind of thing.

Peace

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: snoboard Date: Feb 11, 2005 12:16pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I just wanted to put my two cents in and say that I love lossless formats as much as I love lossy formats. I always download lossless when I am planning on transfering the show to CD. On the other hand I love the fact that I can stream the shows that have mp3's present. I also own an ipod and I enjoy using mp3s for that as well.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: svenkid Date: Feb 11, 2005 1:21pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

the main problem that I have seen is that when I upload shows, and I say "no" to lossless, it makes them anyway. then when I try to fix it, it will fix it like 50% of the time. I guess Ill just have to fill out a ton of error reports, lol.

I for one do not like the % of times this has happenned, and a "no" to lossy formats on the archive

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffBrak Date: Feb 11, 2005 2:26pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Please watch this behavior over the next week. After checking the box, the extra copies should now reliably disappear within a day.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Big Daddy WooWoo Date: Feb 11, 2005 1:51am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I personally love the .mp3s on the site. It's not like I download them and burn them onto CD, I just like having my computer plugged into my stereo, and I have music on-demand when I want it.

Now if I am adding a new CD to my CD collection, I'll download the entire lossless show.

I know many people who are technically incapable of downloading a SHN or FLAC, converting it to a wav and burning it on a CD (even if they have everything they need computer-wise, they just don't have the nerding skills needed), but they are perfectly capable of clicking a button and letting the music stream on their stereo.

And spreading the music is what this is all about.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: willfoy Date: Feb 11, 2005 7:44am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

As an occasional uploader, having the deriver around hasn't changed my thoughts on lossy formats in this respect: I don't mind lossies for personal use, like the gym, the car [ my old car's cd player used to play mp3, but not flac or shn ], or streams for playback just when you want a show in the background. As a reasonably old trader, I wouldn't want shows circulating from Mp3 sources as the main method.

But, that's part of the genius of this model. Both the lossy sources AND the lossless sources exist side by side for separate needs. One poster had the thought that he'd rather see just streams, but the deriver can handle the processing ONE time to do a pretty darn good conversion to various lossy formats for any DL'er who wants an OGG or MP3 set.

Example: I want to stick some stuff on my portable MP3 player which in this hypothetical, doesn't support FLAC [ I know of no player supporting SHN at this time ], so I can listen at the gym. Rather than take a long time to DL a FLAC or SHN of a band I'm going to investigate while sweating, I can DL the MP3 or OGG files already done and ready to transfer to my unit in a few minutes. Doing it the "hard way" although as a transferrer and taper, I know it's not that hard to do, it's time-consuming when you want to get out the door in 30 minutes with some tunes to weightlift and cycle by.

So, if the band I'm uploading permits lossies to be encoded, I don't mind, especially since the lossless version is always available. Who cares if Ted Turner colorized a movie when Criterion's awesome edition is around TOO?!

Lossies might get more fans using this service, or moreover, encourage more fans to get out of the one or two bands in their niche and listen to more stuff. I'm much more likely to sample a band I've never heard of if I can stream it or listen to a smaller download and see what I think. I'm then likely to download the lossless version, and consequently to see a show, buy merch, etc. That's not part of Archive.org's mission [ to stimulate commerce for the band ], but it's certainly in the back of a large number of artists' minds in why they permit fan recording, as it costs them little to nothing, and represents no loss of profit, and perhaps enhances their profits by getting people to come to shows, and buy stuff.

Bands and tapers can always opt out, and I know I speak on behalf of admins here... those of us who can remove shows or resolve problems like a show where band lossy = ok, but taper lossy = no, and there are lossies up there? It's resolved as quickly as humanly possible. We're human, and we do the best we can, on behalf of all the parties we're called to serve: the archive, the artists, the contributors, and the beneficiaries of what we do. That's a lot of masters to serve.

Long story short: Lossies on archive! Good, so long as is optional, and so long as lossless always placed side by side.

This post was modified by Brad Leblanc on 2005-02-11 15:44:30

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: muzzard67 Date: Feb 25, 2005 10:06am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I love the ability to listen in MP3 format. If I really like a show I then download the shn/flac. And I absolutely love this site it is the BEST!!!!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: tfl Date: Feb 11, 2005 1:46am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I think the MP3s are a good idea. As much of a lossless freak as I am - I can't really fit much data onto my MP3 players.

When I have the choice between a great Dead concert in MP3, vs no shows, the answer is easy. Besides, my MP3 player is not all that good anyway to be able to hear much difference!

Yes, I know that I _could_ make an MP3 copy, but in all likelyhood I wouldn't. For me, the MP3s are very convenient. Taking Terry's analogy of a real library - I know I could get a tape recorder and read a book into a tape, but I'd find it a whole lot eaiser to just take the tape out.

Another nice thing is that the MP3s can be streamed (not really possible with SHNs), so I can play music where I am. The other night I was in a hotel in London, listening to a great Dead show on my headphones while working on mail. It was fantastic.

I think that providing multiple formats is a good thing and can only widen the circle of users. I now regularly stream a show into my classroom when I teach.


This post was modified by tfl on 2005-02-11 09:46:04

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 11, 2005 2:33am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I now regularly stream a show into my classroom when I teach.

Whoa, you must be "the cool teacher" we all wished for in school. :)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Unpopular Poet Date: Feb 25, 2005 6:34am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Streaming is essential to the development of bands to the non-fan. The lossless version is avaiable, so where is the integrity being compromised? Streaming has also become a huge part of my day - I discover new music and in turn support that band financially if they have cds released or go see them in concert. I think if the band allows MP3, it is downright rude for a taper to say no. Let the band decide. If there are both formats avaiable, then both the Tapers and Musicians win.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffBrad Leblanc Date: Feb 11, 2005 1:54am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I can see MP3, but doe OGG for example, generate enough usage to make it worthwhile?

One thing worth mentioning is that Ogg Vorbis is an open source, patent-free project.

http://www.vorbis.com/

MP3, on the other hand, is proprietary and usage is governed by a license.

http://www.mp3licensing.com/royalty/software.html

(the fees are for software development using the format, not end user playback)

This post was modified by Brad Leblanc on 2005-02-11 09:54:22

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffJ.B. Nicholson-Owens Date: Feb 12, 2005 2:35am
Forum: etree Subject: Unencumbered codec support is important.

This point is very important for me because I run a free software system with nothing but free software installed on it. I like to preview with a smaller lossy file and then get the FLAC afterwards. Using unencumbered codecs (Vorbis, FLAC, even Speex support would be nice) makes this possible in a way everyone can use.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Chase Banna Date: Feb 11, 2005 1:49am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Personally, I find that since lossy audio formats have been added here it hasn't affected me at all as a taper. I was against adding lossy formats here a year ago and have only allowed one of my shows to be converted to a lossy format. This was for a band that I know who wanted it to be in mp3 because some of their friends/fans are not computer literate enough to handle lossless formats. I have a group of people that I trade with and get hooked up with pretty much anything I really want and more.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: be Date: Feb 13, 2005 5:10am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I thought I'd write a couple words myself.
A provoking thought: do we need to hold the shn/flac versions online? The problem with mp3 is accenuated with repeated burn/rip. Why burn/rip again and again when the pristine 192 mp3 is available for immediate download? (I personaly prefer 160 to 320 vbr) And if we're on that subject why download if you can stream?
And another holy cow: the quality of most recordings (and excuse me tapers - I really appreciate what you're doing and I am a taper myself) is not really complemented by shn/flac encoding and not really downgraded by high level mp3 encoding. If you've invested tens of thousands of dollars, or even thousands, in high end stereo systems, like some of us have, you're going to get the official version anyways.
About ogg and stuff, I don't see the point.
I think archive/etree priorities should be: a lossless copy for posterity; easy to download/latest lossy tech versions; streaming; improve access to music through style, instrumentation, genre etc./education against piracy/watchdog against excessive commercialization of music/creativity/cooperation.
These are my two.(bits)
BeBop.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 13, 2005 6:50am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I think archive/etree priorities should be: a lossless copy for posterity; easy to download/latest lossy tech versions; streaming;

Of your checklist, I think we can say "check" to these with what we have now, except that from user comments here we should look into ogg streaming too.

improve access to music through style, instrumentation, genre etc.

There's room for improvement on that here, for sure! The alphabetical list is pretty massive/daunting at this point.

/education against piracy/watchdog against excessive commercialization of music/creativity/cooperation.

"It takes a village" on that one, I think.

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-02-13 14:50:22

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: nedboz Date: Feb 25, 2005 6:03am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I stream everyday. keep up the good work....it is MUCH appreciated!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: twatts Date: Feb 17, 2005 11:23pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Diane, it seems the mob has spoken.

T

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: silentmark Date: Feb 25, 2005 5:21am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I feel that it is an "instant gratification" mentality that demands mp3's or streaming for that matter. It is not enough that you get the music for 'free', but that people want it free NOW...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Sangamon Taylor Date: Feb 25, 2005 6:06am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I don't see any demands. I see music fans that dig music, I see a website that recognizes the importance of preserving said music, and I see a community that recognizes the value of accessibility to allow the artists to make a living playing music and to provide enjoyment for the fans.

Why do these bands allow us to tape their shows? What do they think we do with these tapes? When they get emailed and asked if they want to be a part of this project, why do they all say "Yes, that sounds cool."?

Answer that, and then tell me again why Instant Music is a bad thing.

This post was modified by Sangamon Taylor on 2005-02-25 14:06:55

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: silentmark Date: Feb 28, 2005 4:11am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

You obviously haven't had anyone give you sh*t for not allowing the mp3/stream, well I have. Frankly it is rather insulting and quite ignorant. Instant gratification mentality, bang !

Anyone that can stream (dial uppers are sh*t outta luck, trust me cause that is what I have at home ...) will already have the bandwidth, why can't they dl the shn/flacs, blow them up to wav and make mp3's for themselves ? Lazy perhaps ? Too lazy to educate themselves about shn/flacs ? If a person can send an email or surf a web site, they sure as hell can blow up a shn/flac and convert it to a mp3. Something else to think about ...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 28, 2005 5:08am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Separate issue to address:

Anyone that can stream (dial uppers are... outta luck, trust me cause that is what I have at home ...) will already have the bandwidth

Shoot, are you saying we still are not getting toward our Universal Access goal here with the choices we have? I haven't been using anything lower than cable modem speed so I can't judge empirically.

I do know my nontrader/senior citizen father, who has 56 kbps dialup, has been able to listen to mp3s from this archive. Perhaps he has downloaded songs one by one instead of streaming, I'm not sure. But functionally, in terms of being able to access music, it has been doable for him.

Can knowledgeable folks help me out here? I'm no techie...

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-02-28 13:08:04

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Ole Uncle John Date: Mar 5, 2005 12:07pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

As one currently living in GMT+4 time zone and stuck with a 56K connection I also am limited to MP3 format for downloads. Streaming cuts out and re-buffers too much for me at this speed so I often download just a few minutes of a file then sample it before choosing to download the whole. Although I appreciate and respect bands rights to not allow lossy it’s sad that it means all those in my boat will never get a chance to hear them:(

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 28, 2005 5:07am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

had anyone give you sh*t for not allowing the mp3/stream, well I have. Frankly it is rather insulting and quite ignorant.... Too lazy to educate themselves about shn/flacs ?

In our outline was this mission:
* strongly encourage lossless formats for uploads (education)

From what you're saying Mark, it's clear the "education" mission needs to go a bit farther, making sure we're educating not just about uploading, but about downloading these large files- and about why downloading choices might be restricted (as in the case of your preference).

But just asking for self education is often a really high bar, particularly for some of the very technical stuff. Better is for the already educated to serve as mentors, or at least gently to provide a few pointers to FAQs and resources. How do you reply to the so-far uneducated folks who contact you?

Also, if we could look at your experience in more detail: About how many shows do you have up here overall? What artists are represented? How many of this kind of message have you gotten over the last year? How do the patrons know to contact you? Are you getting repeated messages from particular people, or a scattering of one-shot messages from a lot of different people? Does it seem to be fans of particular artist(s), or wide-spectrum (assuming you are a wide-spectrum uploader)? Has the rate of these incoming messages changed over time, and if so how?

Other uploaders/tapers: Are you also seeing negative feedback from patrons, and can you provide similar details of your experiences?

If it's a common problem, I'm wondering if we could work out some extra FAQ question, or even a little form letter for uploaders to use in reply to unwanted requests... Or maybe it's a particular fan community for a band or two, needing education (I'm just thinking of a funny Sublime thread I saw elsewhere the other day).

Thanks for the valuable report, Mark! I really do want to get more data on all sides of the issue here. We have a lot of positive experiences represented in this thread, but we need to hear about the negative as well.

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-02-28 13:07:26

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Mar 12, 2005 1:23am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Despite an exchange we had in another forum about the need to specifically address this possible issue, neither Mark nor others have discussed it further. At this point I can only assume it's not a significant general problem.

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-03-12 09:23:58

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: twatts Date: Feb 25, 2005 6:09am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

As quoted from My Uncle Vinnie:

"No self-respecting Southerner eats instant grits."

T

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: twatts Date: Feb 25, 2005 5:33am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Agreed 100%.

TJ, my fav hero said this:

"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine."

A good commentary on Democracy and the Rule of the Majority:

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_141975.html

Terry

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Sangamon Taylor Date: Feb 25, 2005 6:15am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

And as I understand it, uploaders still have the choice of whether or not they want the lossy files. No taking away of rights there.

You can use that quote again when the choice is removed - which won't happen.

What it sounds like you are trying to achieve twatts is removing that choice.

This post was modified by Sangamon Taylor on 2005-02-25 14:15:47

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: twatts Date: Feb 25, 2005 6:14am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

No actually I'm not wishing to take the choice away from the tapers. I'm wishing to take MP3 away from the Archive so the whole issue of MP3 or NO MP3 being in the hands of the tapers is moot.

The quote is more aimed at how the majority of consumers can have influence over the minority if producers.

Terry

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: thelandlady Date: Feb 25, 2005 7:42am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

What your saying is that your more out to take the choice of the tapers away? Your more into limiting the options of those who actually contribute to this...your really into taking away choices of those that effect this more than you.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 17, 2005 11:42pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://mobilevulgus.com
;)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 12, 2005 7:25am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Just noticed this review of the LMA itself by a nontrader who used the mp3 choices, apparently to cut down on "bewilderment":
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/02/11/020410.php

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-02-12 15:25:30

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: macdaddy Date: Feb 13, 2005 1:46am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

i posted this response somewhere else, but i figure it belongs in this discussion...

my $.02

i believe in access to the music, and the inclusion of "lossies" certainly provides access to many, many more people, and this is a very positive thing that i certainly want to encourage - all of my recordings that have been posted to the LlaMA have included lossy formats...

as for the mp3 > WAV issue, posting the lossy and lossless side by side, and providing access to both types of formats should at least minimize the problems of mp3 > WAV. it is still going to happen, but if we make the lossless available, hopefully most cats that care about lossless will know to go to the LlaMA and get the lossless there. there is no amount of social engineering taht can stop the people who do not know any better, but by making both formats available, the problem is minimized, and the lossless is on the archive, readily available to all, preserving the integrity of the recording...

the only issue i have with any of the lossy stuff is that you use mp3. i wish you would only use ogg - it is an open format, there is no legal grey area with the patents of the encoder, and it is the RIGHT thing to do...

and an mp3 decoder plugin has to be included in a media player just like an ogg one, so saying mp3 is easier for Joe Computeruser to utilize is not really valid...

keep up the good work, y'all. open discourse is a positive thing.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: twatts Date: Feb 10, 2005 11:58pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

As an old ETREE trader and a new taper over at Taperssection, I see a lot of this discussion. On one hand, I feel the Lossless aspect of ETREE and its supporting cast, like Llama, BT, and Furthur is paramount. This is what we all come here for first and foremost: highest quality music for bands we love.

But on the other hand, I also see the intrinsic value of MP3. It is very useful and has SO much support outside of our small niche of the music world, that to ignore or even shy away from it, is stupid.

That being said, as a trader, I demand SHN/FLAC of highest quality, but as a taper, I don't care what happens to my tapes after I seed them.

However, many in the music trading world feel that their standards of quality aren't as demanding, therefore the MP3s. Just as some tapers feel they have some say in how the results of their effort and hard work is presented, hence the demand for NO MP3.

Whcih bring us to the Archive. On a truly archival standpoint, I feel that MP3, while very convenient and very easy, is NOT appropriate. People can easily make MP3s at home for their own use and I do it all the time for the car and for the Nomad 3. However, just as you don't see the library carrying photocopies of everything they have on the shelf, I don't see why we should carry inferior copies of shows in our archives. If people want MP3s of their favorite shows or bands, they can go through the effort themselves.

I think this approach is much more palatable to the tapers, the people who actually feed this whole machine. By only allowing SHN/FLAC, it appeases the taper. But Archive, nor anybody, can truly stop someone from manipulating the files at home.

Carrying MP3 to appease the demand of the DLer, I think, undermines the true purpose of the Archive - an Archive. I don't think we intended to be the JamBand Napster, so why act like it? I feel the people that want MP3 in general do so because they are Leeches and it is the easiest and quickest way to accumulate lots of music. They make the excuse that they want to "try out" a band before DLing, so MP3 should be allowed for ease. But since Archive allows for individual file DL of SHN/FLAC files, I feel this is just a load of crap used to sway the Admins. If people want to "try out" a band, they can visit the bands website, go to the show, trade like we used to HAVE to, or DL a SHN and listen thru any number of SHN player like FooBar, DMPowerAmp anr even SHNamp.

I think the carrying of MP3 on Archive kind of justifies the use of MP3 in our small music world, and I oppose that due to Pollution.

I think the carrying of MP3 on Archive scares many tapers away, thereby limiting, rather than expanding, the Archive. And I oppose that.

But that just my take on it.

Terry Watts
http://db.etree.org/twatts



PS. Just went and looked at the graphs posted above. Interested how in the same time period, the user base increased, yet the concerts ULed to the Archive has decreased. Is this a response from the MP3 community finding us and the Tapers rejecting us???

This post was modified by twatts on 2005-02-11 07:58:40

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 11, 2005 12:47am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Hm Terry, though a heartfelt post from you, I see a lot of veering into the hypothetical realm there already, heh- and covering the ground we already went over a year ago. Let's get into the real realm instead:

Do you find yourself, for instance, downloading more or less items as some result of having the derivations here? Uploading more, or less? Perhaps personally dealing with more or less trader confusion over in your trading realms, that you could attribute directly to this?

From my own experience at the user level, I find I have been listening to more varied tunes here, and checking into more varied/unknown-to-me bands here, thanks to the streaming option. Yes, I could have always gone to the bands' websites to see if they happened to have sample music, but I just didn't before. Now, I sample here. It's not an "excuse."

Example train of my thought: "Wow, interesting name, I wonder what kind of music they play? (click show item) Hm, can't tell from song titles. (click 1 mp3 track or hit stream). Hm, nice guitar work there- an instrumental? Yay!" etc

The lack of some kind of category/keyword system actually pushes me into doing it more. But even if there were a category system in the future, I imagine I would still be doing as within my example, perhaps comparing bands intra-category. (For instance, not all instrumental bands are created alike.)

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-02-11 08:47:37

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: twatts Date: Feb 11, 2005 4:40am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Well, if you want my real experience with Llama, it is none. I have no highspeed access and can't DL anything at work, so my participation with Llama is only observational. I've never DLed either SHN or MP3 from Llama. So really to stick to Diane's query, it makes no difference to me personally whether we carry MP3, WMA, OGG, APE, WAV, or any number of a million formats.

Perhaps all I did was rehash the debate from last year, but this debate is still ongoing, at least in the Tapng community. Almost once a week, I read about some show on Archive being converted and reULed by someone else after some kind of change being made, good bad or indifferent. It pisses the tapers off, that they put hours and monies into their hooby and someone else messes with it.

Want the reality? The reality is this: you piss off the tapers, and you don't have $#!+, MP3 or otherwise.

And like I said in my post MP3 is very convenient, very useful, but doesn't have a place in a Lossless music world. I use it myself, but it tends to piss the tapers off.

I used to have Hi-Speed and when I did, I used Furthur (before Llama). It got to the point where there was so much crap on there, I stopped using it. MP3 converted to SHN, mislabeled sources, bad transfers, bad everything. No offense to Allen, but it got pretty bad.

I just don't want Llama to turn into a music swap meet.

Diane, do what you will. You've known me long enough to know I won't really care and like rocking the boat more than anything.

Terry

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 11, 2005 10:18am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I have no highspeed access and can't DL anything at work... I've never DLed either SHN or MP3 from Llama.

Do you have dialup at home, though? And if so, is it still too cumbersome to d/l even the smaller mp3 or ogg files for a little listening? (Meaning, is the "access barrier" still too high for you?) Or, is it mainly personal disinclination stopping you from trying a download?

Just wondering if we could draw you in at some level, sir. :)

debate is still ongoing, at least in the Tapng community. Almost once a week, I read about some show on Archive being converted and reULed by someone else after some kind of change being made, good bad or indifferent

From my review of part of the record in the taping community, some irksome changes that were/are made were not just going to say flac> mp3, they were going like flac> "edit/remaster/reprocess" > flac. That places those examples outside the file format discussion at issue here, and within more of a recording "remastering" debate issue. (Perhaps that's actually even a good general topic for another time, just not in this thread.)

Also, we would still reject/remove any sneaky say, flac> mp3> flac upload attempts here if we ever found some.

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-02-11 18:18:56

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: thelandlady Date: Feb 11, 2005 5:17am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I personally feel that Llama is a much easier service to maintain that FurtherNet would be. I used to use Further all the time until I noticed mp3 sources changed in SHN. Thats why when I want controlled quality I come here.

Also, like I have said before...it should be up to the tapers to decide of they want it converted or not. They are the ones we should respect...they are the ones out there getting this...we should repsect their decisions the most...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: thoman8r Date: Feb 11, 2005 1:58am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Ok, if you want to keep this discussion strictly practical, here is the bottom line for me:

I don't mind mp3s being here as long as:

1. Tapers (not uploaders) are given assurances they will always be able to opt out of lossy versions (as long as it doesn't conflict with the wishes of the artist).

2. Any mp3 versions that are created by accident (either because of a bug in the archive's software or an uploader other than the taper created them), are removed by the archive staff in a *timely* manner.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: thelandlady Date: Feb 11, 2005 4:11am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

this is to me the best approach to this. If the band/taper doesn't want lossy files then they should have the option to do so. If they opt out...we should all respect that.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 11, 2005 2:23am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Excellent input Dave, thanks!

For other participants, just to restate what we're after here- we want to have some concrete answers to these essay questions:

"The supplemental mp3 idea is not working out for me/my community/my band/the archive, because: ...."

"The supplemental mp3 idea is working out for me/my community/my band/the archive, because: ..."

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffTyler Date: Feb 14, 2005 4:20am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

"The supplemental mp3 idea is working out for me/my community/my band/the archive, because: ..."

it is working out for me because it allows me to have created at the time of seeding a show quality controled / universal quality mp3s to be hosted along side the original master flac files I upload. i don't have to worry about people making 4th gen questionable mp3s down the road ... if they ever want mp3s, there they are, 1st gen derived right from my master files.

i'm a taper, and the number of shows I seed since the mp3s started has been the same if not increased.

the number of unknown bands i 'sample' and try out randomly has gone from 0-1 a month pre-mp3 to 10 or so a month post-mp3 ...

the streaming option has turned many of my work friends onto the archive, who previously had never heard of it.

I have seen nothing but good things come from the mp3's in the year test period and I think the middle ground (allowing tapers and / or bands to opt out) is a perfect world and works to appease all parties.

as an admin, when bugs / mistakes happen with mp3's being made when there should be none, we really try to fix it asap, i know it takes a day or two sometimes but we really do regret when that happens and try and fix it asap.

thanks for having the archive around and making it such a usefull tool of the live music trading world.

tyler

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffBrad Leblanc Date: Feb 11, 2005 9:35pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

1. Tapers (not uploaders) are given assurances they will always be able to opt out of lossy versions (as long as it doesn't conflict with the wishes of the artist).

This is how it's been since day one. I have had numerous requests to both create/remove lossies from tapers that did not upload their recordings. All of which have been granted. (unless there was no room on the server to create the requested lossy files)

2. Any mp3 versions that are created by accident (either because of a bug in the archive's software or an uploader other than the taper created them), are removed by the archive staff in a *timely* manner.

A reasonable request. Help us understand "timely" Dave and we'll brainstorm a means to do this better.

An hour, 4 hours, 24 hours? Obviously the shorter the time period the harder it will be for us to make it happen, but we'll try to work something out.

This post was modified by Brad Leblanc on 2005-02-12 05:35:04

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: thelandlady Date: Feb 11, 2005 2:13am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I disagree with this post on many levels. I know when I checking out a band that I have never heard before that it is much faster to grab an mp3 of it than it is FLAC/SHN of them. I can grab 3 or 4 mp3's in a few minutes to check the quality of a show. I have done this when I hear a certain band in coming into to town and I have never really heard any of their music. I grab 3 or 4 mp3's toss them to my friends and we listen in a matter of minutes. A lot of my friends have no clue what a SHN/FLAC and don't even care what they are. I have gotten into quit a few bands on here because they have an mp3 of a show.

I would object to this more if they only allowed mp3 sources on here or forced the taper to allow them. The decision is still up the taper when they upload the files. It is an archive and I still use it as such. If I want a lossless copy of it then I'll download it and keep for myself.

I am sorry, but having an elitest attitude about this place with only further drive people away from experiencing this at all.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SFSpearit Date: Feb 11, 2005 12:13am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

For the record I am thrilled with MP3 on the LMA.
Other people I know in the Spearhead community are as well.
One big reason - 56k modems. Spearhead has a lot of international fans. I know people in several other countries who download MP3 because there is no broadband in their city or country! To me I look at LMA as both a historical archive and a library. Keeping SHN/FLAC for historical archiving is great and should never change, but in its library function MP3 is a great tool.

In my opinion the archive has done the right thing by hosting lossless and losy formats.

I totally respect the Etree tradition of lossless/verifyable sources.
But once the lossless source is available what is the real harm of MP3? The people who care about lossless compression still have access to the files they want. AND TAPERS WHO DO NOT WANT MP3 have that choice! So if the seeder doesn't care why not?

A previous post implyed that MP3 users are Leechers. They only use the format to get as many shows as possible. Using the excuse of 'Previewing a download" I disagree on so many levels and am a little offended.

I personally have "Previewed a download" with mp3. I have used this function to check out other bands. Because of it I have downloaded SHN/FLAC (yes I am one of those people who does care about lossless). Guess what?-- I am not a leecher. I have seeded over 250 shows, as well as running an ftp server that has served out 5TB of music, My collection is entirely SHN/FLAC and numbers in the thousands of shows. The MP3/Leeching model is flawed at best.

Previewing a download happens all the time. My wife listens to MP3 streams at work then tells me what to download and burn.
This has turned her on to many new bands/shows. She has no idea what a FLAC is and will never want to learn. But she knows I do and will tell me what to grab and burn.

A JAM BAND NAPSTER
To me this is all about spreading music. The napster model does not apply. The lossless is ALWAYS available and linked to Etree. Furthernet is far closer to the napster model than LMA.

I think MP3 on LMA has been a huge success and has opened me and my friends and family to lots of new music. It was a wonderful decision. I am asked all the time when there will be a function to convert older pre-mp3 era seeds to MP3. I love that the entire GD catalog is available in multiple formats. I would love to make the entire Spearhead catagory the same.

Please keep MP3. Big ups to Brewster and all of the LMA Admins who keep this show going.

Peace

Matt Ziegler
aka SFSpearit, aka thesparkles

www.loveisdashit.com





I have to disagree with the last post on some points

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: thoman8r Date: Feb 11, 2005 12:04am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Very well said Terry. My thoughts exactly.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffBrad Leblanc Date: Feb 11, 2005 12:17am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Just went and looked at the graphs posted above. Interested how in the same time period, the user base increased, yet the concerts ULed to the Archive has decreased. Is this a response from the MP3 community finding us and the Tapers rejecting us???

You may be right Terry, but since we can't see the numbers before the deriver arrived it's tough to say. I just asked to get that changed to 24 months so we can get a better idea of overall reactions. Thanks for showing us that, a good point.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Mar 5, 2005 11:45pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Thanks to Tracey, at your suggestion we do now have 2 yrs of data showing at http://www.archive.org/about/graphs.php
(Hey, I also just realized the full dataset was presented all along at http://www.archive.org/about/stats.php off the "About IA" page).

So, let's look at a section before the Deriver, say 10/2003-1/2004, then avoid some parts where the GD project folks were staging big chunks of shows at once (like maybe 4-7/2004? I don't know when exactly that was), and compare a more normal later time like 8-11/2004.

I don't see a significant negative impact between the older and newer upload amounts.

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-03-06 07:45:22

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffTyler Date: Mar 6, 2005 12:25am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I concur. I don't see any negative affect to the number of contributions when comparing pre / post deriver. in fact, it seems the uploads increased after the derivations started. I know for me personally, once the derivers started, I was MORE prone / excited / likely to upload shows I've recorded because the artists I was taping all specifically asked that mp3s be available for them up on the archive.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: twatts Date: Feb 11, 2005 5:29am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Llama Thread on Taperssection.com:

"Pet Peeve":
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=34146.0;all

The Tapers:
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=24571.0

Some more from tapers:
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=33304.0

The original conversation tapers had upon hearing the MP3 news a year ago:
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=8281.0

More from tapers:
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=12688.0

More from tapers: http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=14099.0;all

Overall, no matter how I feel about the whole situation, I have to understand how it affects the main source of our music, the tapers. and it really seems that this has been a big issue with the tapers, mostly with a negative standpoint.

I frankly don't care what you do with Llama, I don't use it. But perhaps more thought should be taken about how this whole thing works.

Someone had mentioned being insulted by my calling the DLers leechers, and yes, it was insulting and I apologize. But really, what percentage of users here have UL anything that they themselves taped? Remasters, fixes, etc. don't count. That's not a real seed.

I would venture to guess that 75% of the material up on Llama comes from tapers.

So as I wondered before, since MP3 was introed, we have seen a growth in the user rate, but a declin in the UL rate. Is there a correlation??? My slim and ignorant view says yes, as evidenced by the multiple pissed off taper threads.

So let's face a hypothetical before the reality. If tapers go on strike (suggested in one of the above threads), what is Llama going to do???

Rocking the boat, once again,

Terry

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 11, 2005 6:23am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Some of those links, as you point out, are from a year ago, when we were having a whole other discussion about *starting* the deriver. Instead, let's look back on this just last year that we've had the deriver in place and see what the current impact is.

Another more recent one, starts out a bit forbidding-looking and then has a kinda happy ending if you read it toward the end (Hey, Dustin!). :)

But perhaps more thought should be taken about how this whole thing works.

Eek, perhaps about how it works at TS.com too- you do realize you've started a one-main membership drive by linking these threads here? (Easy) registration is required to read them. I expect many random non-tapers will shortly be peeking in at the taper cracker barrel. ;)

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-02-11 14:23:54

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: twatts Date: Feb 11, 2005 6:33am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Oh, I know most of those posts are contradictory, confusing, old, whatever. In a few, I defend the posting of MP3s on Llama.

I wanted to point out the reaction this whole thing had to tapers since the beginning. I imagine there are lots of folks that don't have any idea what the tapers are thinking and this is a good way for them to learn how the other side thinks.

As for the one-man membership drive, so be it. If there are more newbies, there will be more new music being taped. These newbies, who on one hand may be supporting MP3, may realize the efforts tapers go through and may change their mind.

Happy V-Day Diane, from one PITA to another!

Terry

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffBrad Leblanc Date: Feb 11, 2005 7:53am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I wanted to point out the reaction this whole thing had to tapers since the beginning. I imagine there are lots of folks that don't have any idea what the tapers are thinking and this is a good way for them to learn how the other side thinks.

Well, if we're going to do that I think we should point out some more, real, examples of how it's been working out and what those tapers are thinking.

Jon Goldberg - Archivist for the Disco Biscuits - originally opted out of the lossy formats for the whole artist section. Then, 3 weeks ago sent us an email and requested that we create lossies for the entire artist section. (this will take awhile, not something we could do immediately) Jon has a team of about 15 tapers and uploaders working with him to coordinate all the Bisco you find here.

Eric Vandercar - tapes moe. and the Radiators every once in a blue moon. :) Originally was an opt-out taper, now includes lossies for all of his uploads and has agreed to activate them on all of his past contributions.

Joel Hudson of jamlive.org - if for some reason the streaming files are missing on 1 of his hundreds of recordings here, he's quick to do quality control and let us know it needs fixing.

Chase Banna - mentions above "Personally, I find that since lossy audio formats have been added here it hasn't affected me at all as a taper."

Matt Vernon - without who's help we wouldn't have had any of the GD and Phil recordings - "I have had email correspondence with many heretofore lossless shn collectors who also like the streaming option to sample or listen at work."

Charlie Miller - Steve Kimock Band archivist - now includes lossy files for all of his uploads.

Between those names we are talking about 6,000 recordings here. I don't think it's accurate to make this statement:

"this has been a big issue with the tapers, mostly with a negative standpoint"

I uploaded quite a few of the SCI recordings here. When the deriver was created, I asked the folks responsible for those tapes what they wanted me to do. Only 1 of them asked me to opt out. I went through the system and made sure all of his recordings had been set to "no-lossies". Afterwards, he sent me a batch of about 10 recordings to upload for him. I have not received a complaint from any members of that group.

Do some tapers feel uncomfortable with the system and the lossy files? Sure, we've been aware of that since day 1. Lots of them still opt-out. However, I don't think you can make the assumption that "Most Do".

So, moving on from this old issue, where do we go from here. Whatever side of the fence you are on, what can we do to make the deriver work better for you. If you are an opt-out uploader, what would make this system better for you. If you are an opt-in person, same deal, what can we improve.

-Brad

This post was modified by Brad Leblanc on 2005-02-11 15:53:01

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ericv Date: Feb 11, 2005 3:47pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Brad prompted me to reply to this discussion (which I'll do while I'm waiting for my @FOB DPA4021s split recording of moe.'s Tsunami Benefit at Roseland to upload ;) and I'll try to keep to more practical comments and not overly echo previous comments.

First, my decision on what to upload has never been impacted by whether or not I permission lossy derivations. I am all for sharing the music regardless of how it is encoded. The only drawback that I might note is that the added derivations seem to slow down the process of getting shows in the public domain and arguably compound the potential of bugs getting in the way of the archives.org systems from completing the whole upload process.
Second, the main reason that I acquiesced was that I have good friends who have contacted me over the past year and told me that they really like streaming MP3s at their desk, etc. and many friends who really enjoy the convenience factor of MP3s and Ipods and of not having to convert the files on their own.
Third, while I virtually never listen to MP3s and haven't bought an Ipod (although I wish I bought stock in Apple about the time we started hosting MP3s!! :) I don't overly criticize people who do. Everyone should choose their own poison and everything is relative. While I think that lossless is very superior to lossy compression techniques, I recognize that (1) all digital music is in reality an approximation of continuous analog waves, (2) today's MP3s are of relatively high quality and (3) if I was such a purist why have I not fully evolved into the 24bit 96 or 192mHz realm?
Fourth, if folks want MP3s they are going to easily convert it themselves. I think there is a benefit in knowing that the LMA is at least providing them with high quality MP3s done right. The only lingering concern in many of our minds is that of folks taking MP3s and converting them back to WAVs or the like and/or not disclosing the true lineage.

In summary, I don't have a very strong opinion either way, but overall the benefits seem to usually outweigh the risks/costs.

peace, further...
e

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SFSpearit Date: Feb 11, 2005 7:24am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Adding myself and, Dan Kramer who tape 98 % of Spearhead shows firmly support MP3 on LMA

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Jim F Date: Feb 11, 2005 7:44am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I think MP3 is a good idea. I've been stuck on a dial-up for 5 years, keeping the computer on virtually every night for 8 hours to get shows, mostly MP3, some SHN. I can deal with having lossy audio in my collection. I guess I'm a leech. But what is so wrong with accumulating a large collection of music? Isn't that what it's all about? Isn't that a good thing?

The archive's use of mp3 is great because they are archiving the shows in lossless formats, and also include the option to make things available in lossy formats for personal use. As long as everyone acts in good faith and doesn't trade the lossy shows maliciously, not informing others of their mp3/ogg gens, it is the perfect way to go. The archive can still maintain high standards for archiving audio while also making music easier to sample, fit on smaller hard drives, etc. Please keep the mp3's up and alive.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: macdaddy Date: Feb 12, 2005 6:15pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

my $.02

i believe in access to the music, and the inclusion of "lossies" certainly provides access to many, many more people, and this is a very positive thing that i certainly want to encourage - all of my recordings that have been posted to the LlaMA have included lossy formats...

as for the mp3 > WAV issue, posting the lossy and lossless side by side, and providing access to both types of formats should at least minimize the problems of mp3 > WAV. it is still going to happen, but if we make the lossless available, hopefully most cats that care about lossless will know to go to the LlaMA and get the lossless there. there is no amount of social engineering taht can stop the people who do not know any better, but by making both formats available, the problem is minimized, and the lossless is on the archive, readily available to all, preserving the integrity of the recording...

the only issue i have with any of the lossy stuff is that you use mp3. i wish you would only use ogg - it is an open format, there is no legal grey area with the patents of the encoder, and it is the RIGHT thing to do...

and an mp3 decoder plugin has to be included in a media player just like an ogg one, so saying mp3 is easier for Joe Computeruser to utilize is not really valid...

keep up the good work, y'all. open discourse is a positive thing.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cwier60 Date: Feb 12, 2005 11:50pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

> the only issue i have with any of the lossy stuff is that you use mp3. i wish you would only use ogg

The biggest reason to include MP3 is that the majority of portable "MP3" players don't support the open source formats. Hopefully that will change. Therefore, I download/stream OGG for listening at work, but d/l MP3 to play on my Dell DJ (which supports only MP3, WMA, & WAV).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: KyleMidura Date: Feb 13, 2005 1:45am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

simply put, one of the main tenets of this site is to be able to spread music. Now, while many of those who are posting on this forum have the wherewithal to be able to play shn/flac, the vast majority of internet users do not. This site's popularity has spread like wild-fire throughout my school, as there are a significant amount of Dead Heads and fans of Greyspoke Variety (a local band), and I can safely say that I am one of a handful of people who can say they are comfortable with those formats. I myself download mostly in MP3 as I will be playing it on a CD in my car (which does not have a good sound system) and I already have an extensive music collection and simply don't have the space for lossless formats. If mp3s of a show are not available, I simply don't download it, the absence of mp3s does not force me to download the shn/flac. For those who mastered this audio, it only has the potential to be downloaded by more people, and those who truly appreciate great sound quality (the target audience of these masterers) will download the lossless format anyway.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 12, 2005 2:29am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Just to stir the pot a little more, let's look at Terry's "pissed off tapers" angle as it bears on practical impact here.

In contrast to Brad's list of positive examples above, there were indeed a few negative examples at the time we brought up the mp3 idea: tapers who said they would no longer upload, or mark tapes "no archiving," on principle, no matter whether we had our lossies opt-out or not.

A year down the road now, are we seeing a traceable negative effect from certain tapers following through on their declarations? I'm not talking about overall numbers of uploads. Rather, are we maybe seeing any gaping holes in certain parts of this collection specifically because of that (since tapers often specialize in certain bands)? Have significant numbers of other tapers followed the first protestors' example over the last year? On the other hand, are there a lot of other new non-protesting tapers just stepping into the gaps?

Then, if we decide we're seeing a major negative impact on this front, would some kind of "rollback" even help the problem now? Would that subset of tapers start contributing, or are they already "lost" to us anyway?

Thanks for any concrete examples here!

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-02-12 10:29:48

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffTyler Date: Feb 14, 2005 11:13pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Just to stir the pot a little more, let's look at Terry's "pissed off tapers" angle as it bears on practical impact here.

In contrast to Brad's list of positive examples above, there were indeed a few negative examples at the time we brought up the mp3 idea: tapers who said they would no longer upload, or mark tapes "no archiving," on principle, no matter whether we had our lossies opt-out or not.

A year down the road now, are we seeing a traceable negative effect from certain tapers following through on their declarations? I'm not talking about overall numbers of uploads. Rather, are we maybe seeing any gaping holes in certain parts of this collection specifically because of that (since tapers often specialize in certain bands)? Have significant numbers of other tapers followed the first protestors' example over the last year? On the other hand, are there a lot of other new non-protesting tapers just stepping into the gaps?


the only example I can think of now is in the Jack Johnson community. Boogie Shafer requested all the tapes he made be removed from the archive. though not large in number (i think they were 8-10?) they were spanning of several years, and were the highest quality. Boogie from then on marked his .txt files 'no archive.org' to help prevent furthur tapes being uploaded here. he has also been active watching to make sure stuff of his doesn't come up here and if it does, he requests it down fast. mostly that is hank williams III shows.

Then, if we decide we're seeing a major negative impact on this front, would some kind of "rollback" even help the problem now? Would that subset of tapers start contributing, or are they already "lost" to us anyway?

Thanks for any concrete examples here!


IMO they are 'lost' regardless what the archive does.. they stopped contributing here and i'm fairly certain will never contribute again regardless what the state of the archive is at any point in the future. this is sadening as their quality of show recordings is quite high and they are influencial in the taping world. but they are the only concrete example I can think of out of all the tapers / circles I frequent of people who stopped uploading b/c of the mp3 / state of the archive.

This post was modified by Tyler on 2005-02-15 07:13:59

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Feb 14, 2005 9:45am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Thanks for the feedback! However, if I recall correctly, Boogie started with his procedure *before* any dicussion of mp3s and such, apparently over other issues. Therefore his own case would not necessarily bear on the deriver discussion.

Edit: Indeed, from my notes, Boogie asked for a pull of his JJ items nearly 1 year before we started discussing the deriver.

...However, I do see that subsequent to that action he did express and share an anti-mp3-on-archive feeling with Alex, except that for both it may be folded into a more general anti-archive feeling.

Given Terry's pointing to TS threads above, I suppose I can just point to their own words here:
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=28260

I'll grant you those 2 gentleman appear to be lost to us, Tyler. :(

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-02-14 17:45:38

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: buckaroobonzai Date: Feb 11, 2005 12:07pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

"So as I wondered before, since MP3 was introed, we have seen a growth in the user rate, but a declin in the UL rate. Is there a correlation???"
(Terry made this observation a couple of times.)

Isn't it true that the GDIAP project (nontypical case) was running pretty hot and heavy in the Mar-Jul 04 period which shows the "peak" months? If GDIAP contributions (sample aberration) were factored out of the Concerts Added Per Month graph, I don't think the result would show an overall decline in UL rate.

As for the essay question: I am an avid Patron, and I download only shn/flac which I expand and burn to audio CDs, but I appreciate having the mp3 option (when available) to use as a thumbnail to quickly sample a song or two from a band I don't know (hey, I check out the Staff Picks) -- it's like reading the first couple paragraphs to taste-test an author's style before deciding to buy the book. If I like what I hear, I download the show in lossless form; if I don't, I move on -- having spent less time and made a slightly smaller dent on bandwidth. This has helped expose me to more of the Archive's offerings (not to mention bands I will patronize commercially by buying their tickets and CDs).

The Archive Staff seem to be conscientious, kind, and scrupulous about respecting lossy/lossless preferences of Artists and Tapers/Contributors alike -- notwithstanding a few process glitches. To me, there is no issue. Keep the lossy options.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffBrad Leblanc Date: Feb 10, 2005 11:30pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

see if it increases or decreases our user population significantly

http://www.archive.org/about/graphs.php

The graph at the top shows the number of registered users added per month over the past 12 months. Using the site does not require registering though, so that doesn't represent all of the users.

This post was modified by Brad Leblanc on 2005-02-11 07:30:29

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Mar 9, 2005 3:26am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

While looking for something else, I stumbled on Brewster's 3/2004 observations re download count and batting average:
http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=13082

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dgrayshn Date: Mar 14, 2005 4:14am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I'm not sure I can take the download stats for face value as I've seen how the addition of GD shows on the archive in the past year and how it has over run the site with GD users posting/reviewing/download etc etc...
(which is fine for them.. just a statiscal point i am trying to make)
Not to mention I think the site has just naturally gained more users from word of mouth.... I know for example when i tape shows users will now just ask me if the show will be on archive... rather than before they would ask to get a copy... (I'm not trying to knock anyone here .. gaining more users in any fashion is a postivie thing for sure)

oh and as far as downloading and how mp3's/streaming has made a difference...

I have actually been doing an experiment with shows I have taped.. I decided to upload some shows and make them available with mp3 and some not.. and the only difference I noticed with in the hit count which has to do with people streaming the shows at work etc...
from what I can tell if a band/show is popular enough people well spend the time to get it regardless if they are on dial-up or high speed...

so with that said I wouldn't say the mp3 experiment has been a success or a failure..
I think there is still room for improvement on both sides...

Now of course I am not naive to think we will go back to just shn/flac but what I would like to see is MP3's just for streaming.. and downloads only in SHN/Flac.. or at least have that as one of the options as well!

I can dream can't I
:-)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Mar 14, 2005 5:40am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Thanks for the observations! FWIW Brewster's appear to have been made before the GD went in.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jcsalem Date: Mar 14, 2005 6:12am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Here's a vote for keeping lossy formats available from someone who's been trading for over 20 years. If IA has the resources to support the higher bandwidth, I strongly believe it should continue to allow MP3s alongside the lossless versions.

I believe an archive has two purposes:
1) Preserving information in as pristine a format as possible.
2) Providing access to that information. In IA's wording: "Universal Access to Human Knowledge"

These purposes generally appeal to very different audiences: tapers and causal listeners. I hope IA continues to support both.

Lossless formats are important in achieving #1.

To achieve #2, having MP3s along side the lossless versions are essential. No other format comes close in supporting a wide audience.

I hope the archive will continue to support the needs of the casual jamband fan (and those of us who want to stream a show at work) as well as the archival needs of the taper community.

-- Jim Salem

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: morst Date: Mar 14, 2005 7:28pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

>I believe an archive has two purposes:
>1) Preserving information in as pristine a format as possible.
>2) Providing access to that information. In IA's wording: "Universal Access to Human Knowledge"

I do not think UNIVERSAL ACCESS means ACCESS ONLY FOR THOSE WITH BROADBAND OR LOTS OF TIME TO DOWNLOAD, I think it means ACCESS. I have friends who still use dialup. There are folks around the globe using dialup. Please let's keep the site interesting to them!

Ps I tape shows, I upload shows, I am a sound engineer, and I listen to lossy stuff in iTunes on a real stereo most of the day and night!

pps I resent the pejorative charactarization of downloaders as leechers. What is this site FOR if it is not for downloading? a bunch of uploads that nobody can use!?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jcsalem Date: Mar 14, 2005 9:05pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I couldn't agree more. Would you call brick and mortar library patrons "leechers"?

Although I burn CDs for friends from my loseless copies, I pretty much only listen to the MP3s because that's what my home network and mobile audio gear use.

-- Jim

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: David_Landsberger Date: Mar 21, 2005 8:48pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I think the lossy files are a very useful tool. By supplying MP3s, it becomes much easier for many people to access the files. I am a taper and seeder, and feel that as long as there are lossless files available to the public, it doesn't matter what else is out there. Personally, I like listening to the streaming MP3s directly off the archive, and feel that loosing them would be a great loss.

David

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Dgold / Honest Tunes Date: Mar 14, 2005 1:16pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Dear Diana Hamilton and Archive --

I like the Deriver very much. I often encourage tapers and transferrers (from other forums) to allow the deriver permissions.

I prefer collecting FLAC's, but the mp3 formats are useful for many purposes including streaming; iPods; pre-sampling the songs and quality before downloading.

My only suggestion is to mark the "STREAM" links more clearly, as to which is hi-fi (broadband), and which is lower quality.

Thank you very much. This is an amazing website. I have done a write-up about the LMA when this site hit 10,000 concerts, in An Honest Tune magazine. I will write an update at some point as Archive continues to grow.

--Dgold
www.dgold.info

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: DanK Date: Feb 13, 2005 1:39pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I can't add any insights to what's already been written here, but I like having multiple format options. Please keep the mp3's.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: d1metz Date: Feb 11, 2005 1:32am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

When it comes to the Dead, I only download .shn/.flac. I however agree with Diana. I am finding myself downloading MP3s of bands that I have never listened to or even heard of before. I feel that making the lossy formats available will increase band exposure (it certainly has in my case) and allow users of 56K modems a better chance to get any tunes at all. Being a broadband user, if I download a tune as MP3, like the song/band, I go back and download the entire show in a lossless format. I think lossy format availability is a good thing.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: tamerlane Date: Feb 13, 2005 8:56am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

Just to get my voice heard:

I absolutely LOVE the streaming option on LMA.

My use of the LMA has increased greatly since streaming was added.

I hope that it doesn't change.

Thanks
John

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: little brother Date: Feb 13, 2005 10:17pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Discuss: Evaluation Time for LMA Deriver (mp3, ogg generator)

I have downloaded over 600 shows aND HAVE Always made sure that what gets put on disk is lossless. Everytime. But I ALWAYS check out new bands by either streeming a song or two or downloading a file or two in lossless. Like I have already read by others, I DO NOT think (I know I wouldnt) be able to check out as many new bands. And just for the record I usually end up getting the whole show atleast 85% of the time.
Thanks for Everything